Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 121 (1.88 seconds)
Documents citing Jaya Biswal & Ors vs Branch Manager, Iffco Tokio General ... on 4 February, 2016

Mahadeo Minz vs The Divisional Manager on 8 September, 2022

In view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Jaya Biswal & Ors. vs. Branch Manager, IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Limited & Anr. (supra), certainly, the learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner-cum- Labour Court, Ranchi erred by not awarding Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses and this Court is of the considered view that the claimants-appellants are entitled to further amount of compensation of Rs.25,000/- on account of funeral expenses.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - A K Choudhary - Full Document

Sangita Devi vs Tilku Prasad Chaurasia S/O Ishwar ... on 13 December, 2022

8. Mr. G.C. Jha, learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand defended the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation and submits that the facts of the case are different from the facts of the judgment of Mahadeo Minz & Ors. vs. The Divisional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. (supra) as well as the facts of Jaya Biswal & Ors. vs. Branch Manager, IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Limited & Anr. (supra) as in those cases, no document on the basis of which income of the deceased could have been assessed was filed 4 M.A. No. 271 of 2013 by either of the parties but in this case, documents in shape of the notification of the Government of Jharkhand as well as chart of VDA notified by the Government was placed before the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation and the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation has assessed the income basing upon the said undisputed documents available in the record.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - A K Choudhary - Full Document

Kumar vs M.P.Selvaraj on 23 September, 2020

10.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jaya Biswal's case (cited supra) had considered the facts and circumstances of that particular case and 7/24 http://www.judis.nic.in CMA NO.1588 OF 2018 fixed the monthly wages of the injured at that particular rate. The judgment was not passed in rem and there is no discussion on Section 4(1-B) of the Act and the Notification issued by the Central Government vide Notification No.S.O.1258(E) dated 31.05.2010. As long as there is no discussion on Section 4(1-B) of the Act, I do not think that the said judgment can be applied to the case on hand.
Madras High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - M Govindaraj - Full Document

Smt.Mamta vs Bhav Singh @ Mansingh on 21 March, 2018

This has been accepted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jaya Jaya Biswal & Others Vs. Branch Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. as reported in MACD 2016 (SC) 14 in an accident which had taken place on 19.7.2011. If this analogy is followed, then for all practical purposes and for the case of computation, monthly wages of the deceased will be Rs.4825 with Rs.100/- as daily allowance. It will come out to Rs.7825/-. Therefore, annual emoluments will come to Rs.93,900/-. Out of the aforesaid amount, if 1/4th amount is deducted for personal expenses of the deceased i.e. a sum of Rs.23,475/-, the disposable income will come out to Rs.70,425/-. Looking to the age of the deceased, multiplier of 17 is to be applied as has been applied by the Claims Tribunal, which will take the total to Rs.11,97,225/-.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

National Construction Co. House vs Sham Mahajan And Another on 21 February, 2022

24 Pronouncements in cases Beli Ram Vs. Rajinder Kumar reported in (2010) ACJ 1653 and Krishna Devi & others versus Harjit Singh and another reported in 2018(3)Him.L.R (HC)1618 have been referred for taking into consideration the wages of the employee as claimed on his behalf before the Commissioner, by contending that neither employer nor employee has produced any documentary evidence in this regard, whereas, as also observed by the Supreme Court in case titled as Jaya Biswa & others versus Branch Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited and another reported in (2016) 11 SCC 201, it was duty of the employer to maintain the Register and records of wages as provided under Section 13­A of the Payment of Wages Act 1936. No substantial question of law has been framed in this regard also. However, it is also apt to record that in present case the employee has claimed his wages at the rate of Rs. 150 per day and for calculation of amount of ::: Downloaded on - 21/02/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 17 compensation, his wages have been taken as claimed by him at the rate of Rs.150/­per day.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - V S Thakur - Full Document

National Construction Co. House vs Sham Mahajan And Another on 21 February, 2022

24 Pronouncements in cases Beli Ram Vs. Rajinder Kumar reported in (2010) ACJ 1653 and Krishna Devi & others versus Harjit Singh and another reported in 2018(3)Him.L.R (HC)1618 have been referred for taking into consideration the wages of the employee as claimed on his behalf before the Commissioner, by contending that neither employer nor employee has produced any documentary evidence in this regard, whereas, as also observed by the Supreme Court in case titled as Jaya Biswa & others versus Branch Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited and another reported in (2016) 11 SCC 201, it was duty of the employer to maintain the Register and records of wages as provided under Section 13­A of the Payment of Wages Act 1936. No substantial question of law has been framed in this regard also. However, it is also apt to record that in present case the employee has claimed his wages at the rate of Rs. 150 per day and for calculation of amount of ::: Downloaded on - 21/02/2022 20:11:00 :::CIS 17 compensation, his wages have been taken as claimed by him at the rate of Rs.150/­per day.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - V S Thakur - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next